Noise requirements and planning consent

[Temp]

On 01/01/2023 at 07:15, SteamyTea said:

Was that the RES farce that was on telly a few years back?

 

No this was another one. 

[Temp]

14 hours ago, Sparrowhawk said:

Do you know how the residents found the noise after the wind farm was built?

 

I have low noise tolerance and living with a motorway a mile away and in direct line of sight was distracting and painful. I have heard that people complain about the noise of wind farms but when I have walked near one I haven't noticed much sound.

 

It wasn't built. The Home Secretary called it in and said the impact on a nearby village would be too great.

[Moonshine]

5 hours ago, JamesPa said:

The plan with the roof mount is to take the weight on the walls, thus circumventing the question and avoiding any possibility that the roof deck vibrates and acts as a megaphone. 

 

MCS calculation says that, if the assessment point is invisible from the unit (and 250mm either side of the unit) then it gives a 10dB attenuation.  I find this implausibly high unless its very solid, but presumably the MCS figures do have some basis in fact.  Having said that you implied a post or two back that a window ajar is worth 10dB-15dB, so perhaps 10dB for a visual barrier is not so unreasonable.

 

Just bear in mind if an acoustic enclosure needed to go up there it's heavy too!

 

Rules of thumb are 10 dB for full screening, 5 dB for partial screening. In reality it's can be a bit more complicated than that

[Alan Ambrose]

>>> if the assessment point is invisible from the unit (and 250mm either side of the unit) then it gives a 10dB attenuation.

 

A sheet of paper or a bin bag maybe 😎.

[JamesPa]

2 hours ago, Alan Ambrose said:

>>> if the assessment point is invisible from the unit (and 250mm either side of the unit) then it gives a 10dB attenuation.

 

A sheet of paper or a bin bag maybe 😎.

Well quite!

 

I think this is a weakness of the MCS assessment procedure, but having said that its still miles better IMHO for this application than something based on BS 4142:2014+A1:2019.  I'm all in favour of nuance and flexibility when its proportionate to the circumstance, but when the 'development ' amounts to replacing a domestic central heating boiler with a piece of equipment worth £3K in order to do the same job, a full noise assessment according to a 76 page document is totally disproportionate.  The exception would be in very noisy neighbourhoods, where the background drowns out the ASHP at any likely separation.  I guess that would suggest a slight modification to MCS020 to take this possible circumstance into account and then it could simply be adopted as a standard condition.

 

Based on a simple methodology like this it could then be made a requirement that manufacturers publish and certify the range of acceptable distance/barrier combinations for their unit so only manufacturers have to do the calculations.  If we could get that agreed across a sufficiently large market (say, for example, the EU) then manufacturers would even design to/certify against it, it in the same way as they design to/certify against eg electrical and other specs.

 

If ASHP is to become the norm, as it currently it must, then it has to be as easy as gas in all respects.

 

 

[SteamyTea]

2 hours ago, JamesPa said:

If ASHP is to become the norm, as it currently it must, then it has to be as easy as gas in all respects.

Will this happen if it is easy

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-63941232

 

Think I heard that there is now 10 dead.

[ReedRichards]

14 hours ago, JamesPa said:

If ASHP is to become the norm, as it currently it must, then it has to be as easy as gas in all respects.

 

 

Or oil.  Before I got my ASHP I had an external oil boiler.  The exhaust made a roaring noise that was audible from some metres away but as far as I can tell such boilers are subject to no noise restrictions whatsoever.  There are various new regulations on oil boilers pertaining to efficiency but none on noise.    

[JamesPa]

1 hour ago, ReedRichards said:

 

Or oil.  Before I got my ASHP I had an external oil boiler.  The exhaust made a roaring noise that was audible from some metres away but as far as I can tell such boilers are subject to no noise restrictions whatsoever.  There are various new regulations on oil boilers pertaining to efficiency but none on noise.    

I don't think there are actually any regulations relating to ASHPs either, merely planning constraints and the general requirement not to cause a statutory nuisance. 

 

The problem is that the installation requires planning consent (unless it fits the MCS rules and is installed by an MCS registered installer to MCS standards) and my LPA planners currently (I think) view this as in the same category as air-conditioning, and so impose noise constraints as part of a planning consent.

 

An external oil boiler would, I think, also require planning consent but not a flue or vent pipe nor does a small outbuilding.  Thus an oil boiler is an outbuilding, even if it has a noisy vent, will not require planning consent (but could still constitute a statutory nuisance).  One totally in the open probably would though!

[LnP]

I discussed this with a friend who is an acoustics consultant and spends his time investigating noise complaints from heat pumps as well as commercial fridge units, railway lines, aeroplanes etc. He made a couple of comments.

• Even if you meet the criteria required for the installation to be allowed under PD or have planning permission, a neighbour who finds the noise problematic can complain to Environmental Health who will investigate whether it's a nuisance.
• Their decision will be guided by BS 4142, but it is somewhat subjective - not just a question of measuring sound levels.
• In his experience 42 dB, can be quite a noticeable noise.
• Even if you meet PD criteria or have planning permission, you might find yourself having to mitigate the noise.

If the government want to facilitate the installation of heat pumps, they'll have to deal with this, and we'll all have to get used to the noise.

[JamesPa]

29 minutes ago, LnP said:

I discussed this with a friend who is an acoustics consultant and spends his time investigating noise complaints from heat pumps as well as commercial fridge units, railway lines, aeroplanes etc. He made a couple of comments.

• Even if you meet the criteria required for the installation to be allowed under PD or have planning permission, a neighbour who finds the noise problematic can complain to Environmental Health who will investigate whether it's a nuisance.
• Their decision will be guided by BS 4142, but it is somewhat subjective - not just a question of measuring sound levels.
• In his experience 42 dB, can be quite a noticeable noise.
• Even if you meet PD criteria or have planning permission, you might find yourself having to mitigate the noise.

If the government want to facilitate the installation of heat pumps, they'll have to deal with this, and we'll all have to get used to the noise.

To be frank I think it's unlikely the government will deal with it as the same comments apply to oil and gas boilers, and its a general rule that a planning consent does not immunise against a claim for nuisance). Also the law on nuisance has its origins in long standing common law and I have a hunch that its unlikely Parliament would want to interfere.

 

I fear it needs a few cases to go to court to establish the law.  Sadly I suspect not many would appeal an enforcement notice issued by a local authority so it may be some time before that happens (maybe your acoustic consultant has some info).

 

Incidentally the pd level is 37dBA not 42.  42 includes (for some wholly inexplicable reason) a nominal background of 40dBA but the heat pump alone must meet 38dBA.  I presume your acoustic consultant must know this.

 

There is a long discussion on the matter here: https://renewableheatinghub.co.uk/forums/postid/16949

 

Finally here is the definition of nuisance from the EHO at my local authority (there is more from him if you follow the link)

 

"For the noise to be considered a statutory nuisance it must do one of the following:

• unreasonably and substantially interfere with the use or enjoyment of a home or other premises
• injure health or be likely to injure health"

 

I wonder how likely is it in practice that a judge would find this to be the case with a reasonably installed domestic heating system?  Its a tough call to say that it's unreasonable to heat your home provided you have made some effort to mitigate noise.

 

Edited November 21, 2023 by JamesPa

[ReedRichards]

Completely off topic, but presumably you could complain about smoke on environmental health grounds?

[Dillsue]

10 minutes ago, ReedRichards said:

Completely off topic, but presumably you could complain about smoke on environmental health grounds?

Google EPA section 82.

 

Normal route is via your local authority and section 80, but it can take an age and the LA have to witness the nuisance. As they only work office hours you'll not get far with smoke from a neighbour that lights their fire at 6pm or has a bonfire every Sunday morning. Section 82 is the DIY route.